classic_wowfandomcom-20200213-history
Classic WoW Wiki talk:COTW
Collaboration of the Week usage type stuff= So there probably needs to be some way of managing this. Apparently this was something Silverside did once and never kept up, but I think it is a good idea and from what I saw when I first started browsing around here it gave people good ideas on things to do, that may have been to big for one person to do themselves. The current COTW was just me getting tired of seeing so many external links all over the place and people creating item pages without using (which I really like). [[User:Kirkburn]] brought up on the [[WoWWiki:Village_pump#Style_and_substance|village pump]] how he felt there were to many articles with to little substance, so hopefully we can use this as a way to improve that. The COTWs could be a good way to get things organized as well as ''teach'' people about features they may not know about. As far as actual usage of this, I wrote on the page that it was for an unspecified amount of time, just because a week seems to short to get a lot of things done. Two weeks seems much more reasonable, or perhaps it can even stay at the current description, which is an ''unspecified amount of time, completed when there is a new idea and the current collaboration gets enough exposure.'' [[User_talk:Fandyllic#Collaboration_of_the_Week|Fandyllic]] came up with a basic rule that if you create a COTW you should be part of a [[WoWWiki:Community Teams|Community Team]], which seems like a decent rule if there is no other policy. I was looking at Wikepedia's process and came up with a modified version of it for WoWWiki that could be something along the lines of: -------- '''Creating new COTWs''' * Add your idea for a collaboration of the week below under the [[WoWWiki_talk:Community_Portal/Collaborations/COTW#Possible Future Collaborations|Possible Future Collaborations]] section. * Create a new level two header with the name of your collaboration * Use Subst:Some template that doesn't exist and save it. * Edit the new section you created and add a description of the COTW '''Selection process for COTW''' Collaborations of the week are chosen based on the nominated collaborations below. Whichever one has the most votes is the next collaboration. * If you want to vote in a support of a collaboration edit the collaboration and add #~~~~ to the support section. * There are no 'no' votes, but if you don't think a collaboration is a good idea, you can add comments on why it shouldn't be a collaboration. '''Considerations''' * When creating a collaboration please flesh it out as much as possible, so it can be easily transfered if nominated * If a collaboration has been on the list for more than '''x''' weeks without being chosen and it hasn't received any new votes for '''y''' weeks, then it will be removed from the list. * There is no limit to how many collaborations you can vote in support of, but the chosen article is based on whichever one beats out all the others, so if you want your vote to actually mean something, only vote for a few collaborations at a time. * Only vote for collaborations that you would personally help out with. ---- So the other problem we have is how often do we switch them. Do we want to go with a strict time limit? If so a week? two weeks? If we don't how will we decide when to change the collaboration? Below I put a collaboration that we could make a template out of or something for nominations. Comments? [[User:Ralthor|Ralthor]] 12:46, 4 June 2006 (EDT) :Where do we post what we plan to work on as part of the collaboration? Example I decided to tacjle the epic weapons (and then move to rare weapons - depending on time I have). --[[User:Dracomage|Dracomage]] 11:20, 7 June 2006 (EDT) ::Hmmm don't know, I didn't really think of that. This page seems like the most obvious choice. We could perhaps do what Wikipedia does (I think) and post each collaboration on a new page (i.e. .../COTW/Items) and then just include the page onto here (which is them included onto the collaborations page), that way we could discuss the collaboration as it was going on, or have a better place to discuss future collaboration and improve the wording and such...--[[User:Ralthor|Ralthor]] 12:54, 7 June 2006 (EDT) :::Made a bit of a mess naming the new page, but have a look [[COTW]]. it can probility use with "prettified" and more explanation on what it is and how to use it. --[[User:Dracomage|Dracomage]] 15:27, 7 June 2006 (EDT) :::Hate to ask, but is anyone else planning to get involved in this? I looked at the last 4 days of new pages, and other than 3 or 4 peoples' additions, not seeing a whole lot of new item pages? --[[User:Dracomage|Dracomage]] 05:52, 9 June 2006 (EDT) ::::A lot of people probably haven't seen it as it hasn't changed forever. I am destubifying [[:Category:Item stubs]], my goal is to get it under 200! (although by the time I half way through with Bs I already had two more As to do), so you won't see most of my stuff on the new pages. BTW I will probably at some point make a [[WoWWiki:COTW]] with most of the information from here and then move the [[COTW]] page you made to here as that seems like the most approriate places for the content.--[[User:Ralthor|Ralthor]] 08:56, 9 June 2006 (EDT) All epic weapons loaded With pride I announce that 100% of the epic weapons are now part of the Wiki (I hope)! --[[User:Dracomage|Dracomage]] 06:56, 16 June 2006 (EDT) =Possible Future Collaborations= Template Descriptions Collaboration Description This collaboration is designed to improve the [http://www.wowwiki.com/index.php?title=Special%3AAllpages&from=&namespace=10 templates]. We will be attempting to create meaningful descriptions of the templates, so that people will know how to use them properly. The tags will prevent anything between them from being included in a template. Use these tags at the top of the templates to add a description of the template is for, information on how to use the template, and examples of the template in use. For more information on templates see . Support #[[User:Ralthor|Ralthor]] 12:46, 4 June 2006 (EDT) #[[User:Mikk|Mikk]] 16:24, 4 June 2006 (EDT) ''Bit boring but... hey. Definitely a worthy cause.'' Comments